Comparison of peritoneal equilibration test with 2.27% and 3.86% glucose dialysis solution

Journal of Nephrology

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 67-71

  Cara, Marilena ^a   Virga, Giovambattista ^a   Mastrosimone, Stefania ^a   Girotto, Angelo ^c   Rossi, Vittorio ^c   D'Angelo, Angela ^b   Bonfante, Luciana ^b  

^a Nephrology and Dialysis Unit   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^c NONE

Author keywords

3.86 glucose dialysis solution; Creatinine D P; Peritoneal dialysis; Peritoneal equilibration test; Peritoneal solute transport; Sodium D P; Ultrafiltration

Indexed keywords

CREATININE; DIALYSIS FLUID; GLUCOSE; SODIUM; UREA;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PERITONEAL DIALYSIS; PERITONEAL EQUILIBRATION TEST; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SODIUM BLOOD LEVEL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TRANSPORT KINETICS; ULTRAFILTRATION; UREA BLOOD LEVEL; BLOOD; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; METABOLISM; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PERITONEUM; TRANSPORT AT THE CELLULAR LEVEL;

ADULT; AGED; BIOLOGICAL TRANSPORT; CREATININE; DIALYSIS SOLUTIONS; FEMALE; GLUCOSE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERITONEAL DIALYSIS; PERITONEUM; SODIUM; ULTRAFILTRATION; UREA;

EID: 16844369904     PISSN: 11218428     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Twardowski ZJ, Nolph KD, Kanna R, Prowant BF. Peritoneal equilibration test. Perit Dial Bull 1987; 7: 138-47.
2. Twardowski ZJ. Clinical value of standardized equilibration test in CAPD patients. Blood Purif 1989; 7: 95-108.
3. Heimbürger O, Waniewski J, Werynski A, Tranaues A, Lindholm B. Peritoneal transport in CAPD patients with permanent loss of ultrafiltration capacity. Kidney Int 1990; 38: 495-506.
4. Smit W, Schouten N, ven den Berg N, Langedijk MJ, Struijk DG, Krediet RT, The Netherlands Ultrafiltration Failure Study Group. Analysis of the prevalence and causes of ultrafiltration fail during long-term peritoneal dialysis: A cross-sectional study. Perit Dial Int 2004; 24: 562-70.
5. Pride ET, Gustafson J, Graham A, Mauck V, Brown P, Burkart JM. Comparison of a 2.5% and 4.25% dextrose peritoneal equilibration test. Perit Dial Int 2002; 22: 365-70.
6. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical method for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-10.
7. Mujais S, Gokal R, Blake P, Burkart J, Coles G, Kawaguchi Y, Kawanishi H, Korbet S, Krediet R, Lindholm B, Oreopoulos D, Rippe B, Selgas R. Evaluation of ultrafiltration problems in peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Int 2000; 20 (suppl 4): S5-21.
8. Rippe B. How to measure ultrafiltration failure: 2.27% vs 3.86% glucose? Perit Dial Int 1997; 17: 125-8.
9. Marples D. Aquaporins: Roles in renal function and peritoneal dialysis. Perit Dial Int 2001; 21: 212-8.
10. Rippe B. A three pore model of peritoneal transport. Perit Dial Int 1993; 13 (suppl 2): S35-8.
11. Pannekeet MM, Atasever B, Struijk DG, Krediet RT. Analysis of ultrafiltration failure in peritoneal dialysis patients by means of standard peritoneal permeability analysis. Perit Dial Int 1997; 17: 144-50.
12. Oritz A, Marrón B, Berlanga JR, Reyero A, Gazapo R. Test de Equilibrio peritoneal con intercambio hipertónico: applucatión práctica en un programa de diálisi peritoneal. Nefrología 2001; 21: 362-9.
13. Chen TW, Khanna R, Moore H, Twardowski ZJ, Nolph KD. Sieving and reflection coefficient for sodium salt and glucose during peritoneal dialysis. J Am Soc Nephrol 1991; 2: 1092-100.
14. Wang T, Waniewski J, Heimbürger O, Werynski A, Lindholm B. A quantitative analysis of sodium transport and removal during peritoneal dialysis. Kidney Int 1997; 52: 1609-16.
15. Pannekeet MM, Shouten N, Langedijk MJ. Peritoneal permeability characteristics with glucose polymer based dialysate. Kidney Int 1996; 50: 979-86.
16. Virga G, Amici G, da Rin G, Vianello A, Calconi G, da Porto A. Comparison of fast peritoneal equilibration tests with 1.36% and 3.86% dialysis solutions. Blood Purif 1994; 12: 113-20.
17. Smit W, Langedijk MJ, Schouten N, van den Berg N, Struijk DG, Krediet T. A comparison between 1.36% and 3.86% glucose dialysis solution for the assessment of peritoneal membrane function. Perit Dial Int 2000; 20: 734-41.
18. Waniewski J, Heimbürger O, Werynski A, Lindholm B. Diffusive mass transport coefficients are not constant during a single exchange in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. ASAIO J 1996; 42: M518-23.